Other relevant keywords: Inequality; High- and low-voltage people; Equalizers; Competitors; Masters of knowledge; Masters of things
Igor Yefimov (1937–2020)
Igor Markovich Yefimov was a Russian-American philosopher, writer, and publisher whose work bridged engineering precision with philosophical inquiry. His major contributions include systematic analyses of human inequality and freedom, the development of a unique post-Kantian metaphysical framework, and the preservation of Russian intellectual traditions through publishing. Yefimov graduated from the Power Engineering Department of the Leningrad Polytechnic Institute (1960), where he developed the analytical rigor that would later characterize his philosophical work. He worked as the head of the test bench of the Central Technical Institute (1960–1963) and as an instructor of the branch of the Polytechnic Institute at the Metal Works (1963–1964). From 1969 to 1973, he studied at the Higher Literature Courses. In Leningrad during the culturally restrictive period of the 1960s, Yefimov was a member of the literary group “Gorozhane” (City Dwellers), which included Boris Vakhtin, Vladimir Gubin, and Vladimir Maramzin. This group represented a significant node in the network of unofficial Soviet literature, providing crucial intellectual space for creative and philosophical expression. Only after Yefimov emigrated to the United States in 1978 did it become known that his philosophical works, Practical Metaphysics (Prakticheskaia metafizika) and Metapolitics (Metapolitika), which had circulated in samizdat and were printed in the West under the pseudonym Andrei Moskovit, were written by him.
During his emigration years, Yefimov emerged as a crucial figure in preserving and promoting Russian intellectual thought. In 1981, he founded the Hermitage Publishing House, which published over 250 books in Russian and English during its 27 years in existence, including poetry, novels, memoirs, and essays that could not be printed in Soviet Russia. Hermitage Publishing became a vital platform for émigré literature and previously censored works, playing a crucial role in maintaining Russian intellectual traditions during the Soviet period.
At the same time, Yefimov authored fifteen novels, including Archives of the Last Judgment (Arkhivy Strashnogo suda, 1988) and The Seventh Wife (Sed’maia zhena, 1994). His philosophical works include Practical Metaphysics and Metapolitics, as well as The Shocking Secret of Inequality (Stydnaia taina neravenstva, 1999) and The Coming Attila (Griadushchii Attila, 2008); in 2017, Yefimov wrote his historical-political treatise, The Twilight of America (Sumerki Ameriki). Critics note the philosophical nature of his prose, and Joseph Brodsky wrote that “Igor Yefimov belongs to the great Russian tradition of philosophical writers in the vein of Herzen” (qtd. Panconesi and Dvisova). This comparison to Herzen is particularly apt, as both thinkers combined philosophical inquiry with literary expression and political engagement. Yefimov’s books have appeared in English and French translation, and almost all the books he wrote in exile were republished in Russia after the fall of communism.
Practical Metaphysics
In Practical Metaphysics, Yefimov lays the foundation for his philosophical system. He stands here as the successor of Kantian transcendental idealism, especially the Critique of Pure Reason (1781), which develops a constructivist epistemological system. Following Kant’s philosophical architecture while developing his own distinctive approach, Yefimov engages with Kant’s distinction between a priori forms of human understanding, which structure our sensory experience, and so-called “things-in-themselves,” which serve as the unknowable foundation of that experience. As Yefimov sums up the main points of the Kantian Critique:
- The world outside of us unquestionably exists.
- What it is in itself, we do not know and cannot know.
- All the variety of its effects on our senses becomes unified for understanding in spatial and temporal forms—modes of perception inherent in the very organization of understanding before all experience.
- The function of understanding is to unite all the richness of sensual contemplation in concepts. The function of reason proper is to organize the diversity of disparate ideas into a unity of thought. This kind of reason activity takes place the same way before any experience, based on a priori laws and categories, the most important of which is causality. Categories without concepts and their corresponding sensual contemplations are empty forms without content. (Prakticheskaia metafizika 22)
Building upon this Kantian foundation, Yefimov argues that Arthur Schopenhauer made “the necessary next step that took transcendental philosophy out of its fixed canon and transformed it into a science proper—with inexhaustible possibilities and an infinite path of development ahead” (Prakticheskaia metafizika 30). Schopenhauer posited the universal will as the Kantian thing-in-itself in his The World as Will and Representation (1819). Unlike reason or moral sense, Yefimov notes that “will can be objectified on different levels: the highest in the human being, lower in an animal or plant, and still lower in inanimate nature. Yet everywhere it remains essentially the same, a thing-in-itself, the groundless and underivable essence of the world” (32).
Yefimov’s original contribution emerges in his synthesis of these ideas with Leo Tolstoy’s work on individual will. He explores how Tolstoy considered individual will, or freedom, to be the most mysterious connection between human beings and the unknown, underivable foundation of the world. Yefimov writes that “the consciousness of freedom was the same for Tolstoy as the thing-in-itself was for Kant—moral self-consciousness, practical reason—and as the will was for Schopenhauer” (Prakticheskaia metafizika 47).
Developing this philosophical lineage further, Yefimov addresses the critical question of what the individual will desires. He proposes that “the most important and only aspiration of our will is to exercise its freedom in overcoming the will of the non-self and to expand the boundaries of the realm of I-can” (Prakticheskaia metafizika 49). He believes that “the property of freedom is […] inherent in every will” and that “will in nature is objectified at various levels of freedom” (49). Human beings discern the “expansion or contraction of the boundaries of [their] freedom: the feeling of displeasure and suffering is always a sign of contraction; the feeling of satisfaction and bliss is a sign of expansion” (49). Furthermore, Yefimov postulates that the “inborn level of free will varies from individual to individual” (49). However, he warns that the “theoretical postulate of an inherent inequality of wills cannot have any practical application. No human being can be declared superior or inferior based on [their level of] freedom. The freedom of every human is infinite, but we judge it only by its manifestations, which are always finite and, therefore, cannot serve as a basis for comparison” (313). He also argues that “the process of realizing freedom is possible in any direction that the representational capacity suggests to the self, indicating that it, by acting without any external compulsion, could overcome the will of non-self and thereby gain new opportunities to expand its freedom (49). Later in the book, Yefimov distinguishes between personal and collective wills—the “I-can” and “We-can”—whose interrelationship he analyzes in detail.
Inequality, History, and Politics
In his book The Shocking Secret of Inequality, Yefimov repeats that humans are born free and unequal: “Why the Creator wants us unequal from birth is a tremendous and unfathomable mystery. But that is how He created us” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 96). This theological framing of inequality represents a distinctive aspect of his thought, bridging religious and philosophical perspectives. Humans are unequal not in the sense that “some are better than others by birth, [but] in the sense that the potential of the will of some is noticeably superior to the potential of the will of others. This inequality manifests both in feats and accomplishments and in the most unthinkable atrocities for which the average person does not have enough resolve” (8).
Crucially, “in this difference of gifts, there is no predetermination of fate. Alongside their talents, humans are given the most important gift—the gift of freedom,” according to which they make choices that influence their spiritual and material growth, stagnation, or decline (8). Yefimov uses the following terms to distinguish between the two groups in any human society: “high-voltage” and “low-voltage” people (9). These terms, drawn from his engineering background, emphasize potential and capacity rather than inherent worth. In his other works, he also employs the words “nearsighted” and “farsighted,” emphasizing that both describe defects in vision. Both groups have advantages and disadvantages, and a good, prosperous society depends on a proper balance between them. It is difficult, if not “impossible, to draw a clear boundary between [the high-voltage minority and the low-voltage majority], just as it is impossible to separate the top of a mountain from its foot. But they exist with the same certainty as the top and bottom of a hill” (9).
Tensions always exist between high- and low-voltage people. From the religious perspective, the sins of the first are pride and contempt; the sins of the second are envy and suspicion. In addition, society is divided between two main groups of so-called “competitors” vs. “egalitarians,” or levelers. Politically speaking, both high- and low-voltage people can identify themselves with either of those groups. As Yefimov notes, the “dispute between the two models of political thinking has been going on for millennia, so it cannot be the result of chance, malice, or misinformation” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 14).
In a sweeping historical analysis, Yefimov traces the beginning of the equalizing tendency to Plato’s project of the ideal city-state from The Republic and the beginning of the competitive tradition in the West to Aristotle and his treatise, Politics. The trend of “leveling,” Yefimov continues, promoted equality and social justice and achieved its most extreme manifestation in Soviet socialism. The opposite, “competitive” trend is represented in the twentieth century by the United States, which was built on the foundation of freedom.
Finally, Yefimov draws a parallel between equalizing aspirations, liberal beliefs, and the so-called “masters of knowledge,” i.e., those who work in the intellectual sphere. This analysis of the relationship between intellectual work and political orientation represents one of his most original contributions. It is not without reason that Plato and his followers placed philosophers or scientists at the head of their utopian states. On the contrary, the competitive principle better corresponds to conservative ideology. It is more characteristic of the “masters of things”—people in various industries who are more concerned with practical reality than pure theory. As Yefimov puts it, the “eternal war between equalizers and competitors in the intellectual-theoretical sphere, between liberal and conservative in the political struggle, manifests itself in the social sphere as a discord between the masters of knowledge and the masters of things” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 36).
The Coming Attila?
Yefimov admits that his division of human beings into two intersecting groups—high- and low-voltage, on the one hand, and competitors and levelers, on the other—may appear too general and, perhaps, be an oversimplification, like any abstraction. However, he argues that his analysis may help explain various inexplicable historical phenomena. His application of this theoretical framework to historical events represents a distinctive contribution to social analysis. For instance, he argues that many reoccurring social calamities, such as wars, bloody revolutions, and genocide, can be productively understood as expressions of the innate and eternal conflict between the country’s high- and low-voltage populations. For instance, in his writing on Stalinism, Yefimov cites statistical data showing that the targets of repression were not selected based on ideological preferences, national belonging, or even class affiliation, but on their success in their field and their potential to lead the country forward: i.e., they were its high-voltage population. Hence, the “catastrophe of the Great Terror,” Yefimov concludes, “should be interpreted as a reckoning for innate inequality” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 55).
Yefimov offers the same explanation for the continuous persecution of the Jewish people, repeated pogroms, and explosions of anti-Semitic sentiment. He writes, “the incredible success of the Jews in all fields of scientific, artistic, and financial endeavor cannot, it seems to me, be explained by anything other than the fact that this people—by tradition, and by necessity—takes such great care with its high-voltage representatives” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 87). Hence, there are endless conflicts between the high-voltage Jewish competitors and the low-voltage masses in the countries of their dwelling.
Yefimov’s final nonfiction books, The Coming Attila, The Twilight of America, and The Phenomenon of War (Fenomen voiny, 2019), are devoted to problems facing humanity in the twenty-first century, specifically the United States. These works represent the culmination of his theoretical framework as applied to contemporary challenges. He considers democracies to be social organizations based on a proper but delicate balance between high- and low-voltage populations. On the contrary, dictatorships result from an imbalance, or revolt, of the low-voltage majority against the high-voltage minority.
Yefimov maintains that any social organism requires the “tasks of preservation and growth” (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 27). When these forces are in balance, the state is prosperous; and when they are not, “development ceases, and we see state stagnation” (27). This dynamic view of social development represents one of his most significant contributions to political theory. Yefimov argues that political stability requires consensus between opposing groups, specifically Democrats and Republicans in the American context. He expresses deep concern about technological disruption in the twenty-first century, warning of “bloody turmoil” as developing nations rapidly transition between technological eras (83).
Drawing on historical observations that democracies typically last no more than three hundred years and often decline into tyranny, Yefimov suggests that overcoming internal schisms and international boundaries is crucial for avoiding catastrophe. While he does not provide a definitive solution, he calls for united, high-voltage efforts to bridge differences in worldviews. His provocative conclusion—”High-voltage people of all countries – come to your senses!”—reflects both his Soviet background and his urgent plea for global understanding (Stydnaia taina neravenstva 82).
Mikhail Sergeev, January 2025
Bibliography
Panconesi, Emiliano, and Irina Dvisova. “La letteratura riabilitata: da Nabokov e Cvetaeva a Solženicyn e Brodskij.” In Proc. Conf. Circolo di Cultura Politica Fratelli Rosselli, Florence, 2004. http://circolorosselli.it/040510CV.htm.
Yefimov, Igor M. [Andrei Moskovit]. Prakticheskaia metafizika. Filosofskaia sistema, razvivaiushchaia printsipy Kanta i Schopengauera. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1980; Moscow: Zakharov, 2001.
—. Stydnaia taina neravenstva. Istoriko-filosofskoe issledovanie. Tenafly: Hermitage Publishers, 1999; Moscow: Zakharov, 2006.